Compromise between parties in a criminal case, including those involving serious offences, can be a valid ground for quashing proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, especially when the dispute arises from civil and private matters and the continuation of the trial would be a waste of time.

Court No. - 64

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26228 of 2022

Applicant :- Aasif And 3 Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Rewti Raman Patel

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shravan Kumar Singh

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

1. Heard Shri Rewti Raman Patel, learned counsel for the

applicants; learned A.G.A. for the State and, Shri Shravan

Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

2. Earlier, the below quoted order dated 13.7.2022 was passed

in Application u/s 482 No. 14852 of 2022:

"Heard Mr. Rewti Raman Patel, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Shravan Kumar

Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned

A.G.A. for the State.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of

Session Trial No.51 of 2015 (State vs. Aasif and Others), arising out of Case Crime

No.264 of 2015, under Sections 323, 354, 452, 504 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act,

Police Station Hasayan, District-Hathras, pending in the Court of Additional District

Judge, POCSO-I, Hathras.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the opposite party no.2 has married

applicant no.3, Junaid and is living happily. As the opposite party no.2 has no grudge

against the applicants, therefore, she has entered into compromise with the applicants

and in this regard, the parties have moved applications before the concerned court below

mentioning therein that they do not want to press this case. Therefore, no useful purpose

would be served in continuing the proceedings before the court below and the same is not

only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of the process of law.

Learned AGA, however, submits that it is the concerned court below, which has to verify

the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants

may approach the concerned court below and move an application with respect to

compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.

In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along

with a certified copy of this order within two weeks from today and be permitted to file a

proper compromise deed. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the

verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an

appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as

possible, preferably within a period of two months from today. While passing the order

verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the

parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise

deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not?

The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as

well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for

quashing of the proceedings.

Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive

action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of."

3. In compliance of the above order, the parties are stated to

have reconciled their civil disputes which gave rise to the

present prosecution. As to that, it has been submitted,

exaggerated allegations came to be made arising from

misunderstandings and misgivings which now stand resolved.

Accordingly, the compromise reached between the parties

allowing for criminal prosecution to be withdrawn has been

verified by the learned court below/Additional Sessions

Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court no.1, Hathras.

4. In Application U/S 482 No. 17467 of 2022 (Dharamveer

And 5 Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another), decided on

02.01.2023, it has been observed as under:

"6. From a perusal of the record, it appears, t